Could swithcing to a 4-3 really fix this much?

[supersteeler]

The remaining problem with our system is it takes forever to get defenders up to speed - pretty much every position takes 2 years before players seem to get it, or, at least, the coaches feel that way as young guys don't get to play for 2 years after they are drafted. That sucks. And look at players like Woodley - although once productive, his body breaks down now, every year, from having to try to cover people. It's a waste of time, just let him rush the Gad Damn QB.

You make a valid point about our system on defense. It does take time to get it down, even the great Polamalu had a difficult time his rookie season. On the other hand I don't think we scrap a system because of it difficulty, its worked out well for years.
We use our LB's quite a bit in pass coverage, and I agree Woodley would be better suited to just rush the passer, but the system doesn't work that way. Lamar would be better served to get healthy@100% and cut some weight down so he can do the things they want.

[SteelCrazy]

Yeah, I'm sick and tired! Sick and tired of having the best Defense in the NFL every season. The short comings of the Offense can be over come if we change to a 4-3 D and become a top 25 D instead of a top 3. The Defense is holding the Offense back by being so good. Do the Rooney's like to sleep at the wheel year after year and continue to run this organization into the ground? Someone slap somebody, because this Browns tier team is really making me sick!

[lloydroid]

You make a valid point about our system on defense. It does take time to get it down, even the great Polamalu had a difficult time his rookie season. On the other hand I don't think we scrap a system because of it difficulty, its worked out well for years.
We use our LB's quite a bit in pass coverage, and I agree Woodley would be better suited to just rush the passer, but the system doesn't work that way. Lamar would be better served to get healthy@100% and cut some weight down so he can do the things they want.

I don't disagree that Woodley should apply some damn discipline and mix in some salads to his diet. But just because the system has "served us well in the past" is no reason to assume it's the right path for the future. For instance, we used to have the "picks of the litter" of guys who we could convert to OLBs coming out of the draft. But now, there is far more competition, as so many other teams run 3-4s. So, we no longer can draft pure gems in the 3rd and 4th round as we once could. We now have 15 other teams trying to do the same thing. I am not even 100% sold that switching to 4-3 is our best option, but I hope the team at least considers it. And, and those who said Harrison is not suited for a LB in a 4-3, I say poppycock; he'd serve well as a LB in any system ever conceived on this earth, if he is healthy. That dude would dominate in any system ever conceived by man or space alien.

[lloydroid]

Yeah, I'm sick and tired! Sick and tired of having the best Defense in the NFL every season. The short comings of the Offense can be over come if we change to a 4-3 D and become a top 25 D instead of a top 3. The Defense is holding the Offense back by being so good. Do the Rooney's like to sleep at the wheel year after year and continue to run this organization into the ground? Someone slap somebody, because this Browns tier team is really making me sick!

It's not truly the best D, if we are being honest with ourselves. It is good, but there are 5 others I would take right now over Pgh's D.

[Slapstick]

It's not truly the best D, if we are being honest with ourselves. It is good, but there are 5 others I would take right now over Pgh's D.

But switching to a 4-3 would fix that?

[RuthlessBurgher]

And, and those who said Harrison is not suited for a LB in a 4-3, I say poppycock; he'd serve well as a LB in any system ever conceived on this earth, if he is healthy. That dude would dominate in any system ever conceived by man or space alien.

You don't take a guy who turns 35 this offseason and have him play a position he never played before (with an eight-figure cap hit, I might add). Worilds is the furthest thing from a 4-3 OLB (he'd be a DE in that scheme for sure). Timmons would be a Derrick Brooks like OLB in the 4-3, not an MLB. That means you need an MLB and another OLB. You've seen Hood, Heyward, McLendon, Woods, etc. attempting to rush the passer from a 4 man line in nickel and dime defenses (they aren't charged with simply occupying blockers in specialty defense on passing downs)...how effective have they been at this task? Enough to trust them to rush the passer full time in the nickel, dime, and base 4-3? Attempting to switch to a new defensive scheme when we are already pressed up against the cap is foolhardy at best.

[lloydroid]

But switching to a 4-3 would fix that?

It could. There is just something missing with this current version of Dick's D. The lame no pressure on the QB and the non-existent turn overs are a problem. I am sick of the "super complicated" D and long for a D where players no what their assignments are without needing to learn Einstein's theory of relativity. I honestly think a DL of Woodley, Hood, Heyward, McClendon, Woods, etc. plus a rookie could do better at getting pressure on the QB than our current system does. All I see now is our LBs being stood up (or in Harrison's case, wrapped around the head and neck) trying to fight through players who outweigh them by 100 pounds.

[birtikidis]

Not blowing 4th quarter leads on defense would be nice.

Not getting shredded by jokes like Carson Palmer and Matt Hasselbeck comes to mind.

Jokes like Carson Palmer and Matt Hasselback should never be in the game because the OFFENSE should score a ton of points against teams that have such terrible defenses. How we score less than 30 on the titans, raiders and other mentally challenged teams blows my mind.
But the reality is that ALL THREE fazes of the game have consistency issues. With offense it's scoring in the redzone and turnovers. Special teams penalties kills us. I feel like we should NEVER return a punt or kick because we have a much higher chance of a penalty than a good return. On defense it's forcing turnovers. When you rank in the top 10 in points allowed, then guess what, giving up fourth quarter touchdowns shouldn't be a problem IF your offense can score.

[lloydroid]

You don't take a guy who turns 35 this offseason and have him play a position he never played before (with an eight-figure cap hit, I might add). Worilds is the furthest thing from a 4-3 OLB (he'd be a DE in that scheme for sure). Timmons would be a Derrick Brooks like OLB in the 4-3, not an MLB. That means you need an MLB and another OLB. You've seen Hood, Heyward, McLendon, Woods, etc. attempting to rush the passer from a 4 man line in nickel and dime defenses (they aren't charged with simply occupying blockers in specialty defense on passing downs)...how effective have they been at this task? Enough to trust them to rush the passer full time in the nickel, dime, and base 4-3? Attempting to switch to a new defensive scheme when we are already pressed up against the cap is foolhardy at best.

OK, so let's just fold our arms and give up and do nothing.

[Crash]

Jokes like Carson Palmer and Matt Hasselback should never be in the game because the OFFENSE should score a ton of points against teams that have such terrible defenses. How we score less than 30 on the titans, raiders and other mentally challenged teams blows my mind.
But the reality is that ALL THREE fazes of the game have consistency issues. With offense it's scoring in the redzone and turnovers. Special teams penalties kills us. I feel like we should NEVER return a punt or kick because we have a much higher chance of a penalty than a good return. On defense it's forcing turnovers. When you rank in the top 10 in points allowed, then guess what, giving up fourth quarter touchdowns shouldn't be a problem IF your offense can score.

Um, we scored 31 in Oakland.

Still lost.

[papillon]

Um, we scored 31 in Oakland.

Still lost.

And in two of the biggest games of the year Ravens I and Bengals II the defense didn't concede a touchdown, still lost.
Can't compare losing to Ravens and Bengals when the defense doesn't give up a TD to losing to the Raiders.

Not only did the defense not give up a TD, but the offense gave one to the Bengals.

Pappy

[fordfixer]

And in two of the biggest games of the year Ravens I and Bengals II the defense didn't concede a touchdown, still lost.
Can't compare losing to Ravens and Bengals when the defense doesn't give up a TD to losing to the Raiders.

Not only did the defense not give up a TD, but the offense gave one to the Bengals.

Pappy

Won't work for his agenda so those stats don't count.

[birtikidis]

Um, we scored 31 in Oakland.

Still lost.

and our offense turned the ball over twice. Once on our own 30. Anytime you lose the turnover battle, you're likely to lose the game.

[Crash]

Can't compare losing to Ravens and Bengals when the defense doesn't give up a TD to losing to the Raiders.

We lost to the Ravens with our #2 QB, and without Antonio Brown. Let's be consistent now, the defense isn't the only unit who has injuries here.

We lost to the Bengals who made the playoffs when the O struggled

The defense was absolutely DESTROYED by Carson Palmer, who does NOTHING anymore except when it's garbage time. He's been a joke since his 2009 return.

And yet he always seems to play well against this defense.

[Crash]

and our offense turned the ball over twice. Once on our own 30. Anytime you lose the turnover battle, you're likely to lose the game.

Actually what lost that game was THREE TIMES the offense scored touchdowns.

And THREE TIMES the defense gave a TD right back.

Make one stop, of the three, and they win.